A New Assault on Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae

22.12.2022

A New Assault on Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae 

There is no shortage of Catholics who reject Humanae Vitae (HV), one way or another, and would like to assuage their consciences by seeing it “revised” and effectively consigned to the archives of the Vatican. In the run‐up to the Synod on Synodality in 2023, you can expect such requests to appear in the proposals of western countries, backed up by clever theologians and “compassionate bishops”. 

In Rome, the restructured Pontifical Academy for Life (PAL), under the direction of Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, has given clear evidence of following this path, most recently in its publication, The Theological Ethics of Life: Scripture, Tradition and Practical Challenges. The collected articles are heralded as “a revolution of Catholic morality” which subverts the teaching of Humanae Vitae and other things. 

Nothing new in that, you might comment. In 1968, theologians made no bones about their rejection of Pope Paul VI, and several bishops’ conferences formulated their own 

compromises.

The new dissenters are more subtle, and offer a novel argument, claiming that, when they propose that couples may use contraception, they are not contradicting HV but going “beyond the letter of the document to find the deepest intentions of these magisterial texts”. To quote Cardinal Müller, “The new approach, adopted by the PAL, is in fact to state the opposite of the teaching, while at the same time claiming that one agrees.” This makes the argument seriously irrational, the opposite of Aristotle’s law of contradiction: a thing cannot be and not be at the same time. 

Let’s be clear about the authority of this Vatican think‐tank. It is just that and no more; it does not share in the Magisterium, and its reasoning and conclusions must be judged by the twin criteria of orthodoxy and reason. 

The authors question the teaching of HV on contraception and Donum Vitae on medically‐assisted procreation. They insist that HV’s teaching is not infallible but belongs to “reformable doctrine” which makes dissent permissible (especially Maurizio Chiodi). Their efforts are directed to make the 2023 Synod a new forum for dissent to HV. Even a footnote in the final document, that sometimes a couple could be permitted to use contraceptives, would be enough to sow doubt in the absolute teaching of Pope Paul VI. 

Continuity of Churchs Teaching 

The refutation of this error of the Vatican group of theologians, however sophisticated their arguments may be, is the undoubted continuity of the Church’s teaching on this topic, before 1968. The Second Vatican Council was unambiguous in Gaudium et Spes, § 51, requiring that sexual intercourse should have “the full sense of self‐giving and of human procreation”, and, when “reconciling conjugal love with the responsible transmission of life”, stating it is not enough to have a “sincere intention” or a good attitude in favour of life‐giving; the act itself must conform to “objective criteria” that exclude the deliberate prevention of procreation. In turn, the Council referred to the condemnations of contraception by Popes Pius XII and Pius XI (see footnote no 173), showing that this was not a resolution of a doctrinal dispute, still less a new teaching. 

After 1968 Pope John Paul II repeatedly spoke about the issue in his addresses on the Theology of the Body and in his encyclicals, Veritatis Splendor and Evangelium Vitae. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued Donum Vitae and Dignitatis Personae. Benedict XVI pointed out in 2007, “the truth expressed in HV does not change.” Pope Paul VI was in full continuity with the practice of the ordinary Magisterium down through the ages. 

Since earliest times, the Church has condemned the use of contraceptive devices without exception. Keep in mind that contraception was known in ancient Egypt; the methods may have changed but the purpose is the same, and so is its condemnation in the Jewish and Christian tradition. 

Archbishop Paglia’s theologians wish to turn the teaching of HV into a general norm and ideal but one that has exceptions, in other words, contraception is not intrinsically sinful but depends on one’s intention and attitude to the purpose of a marriage, and not on the moral nature of the act based on “objective criteria”. 

Despite the magisterial teaching—firm, constant, and ancient—the issue of contraception has never been popular with bishops and preachers because it is so counter‐cultural. When individual choice is lauded, and the right to privacy is most obvious in the area of married life, what, they ask, is the Church doing passing moral judgment against contraception?

If you want to isolate yourself among friends, even within the family, then state clearly that Humanae Vitae was right. The sensus fidei of the faithful should oppose the latest distortion of Humanae Vitae, expressed by the Pontifical Academy of Life. 

As Fatima’s Sister Lucia declared, the “final battle” between Satan and Our Lord is being fought over marriage and the family. 

See: Going Beyond the Letter of the Law, Cardinal Gerhard Muller, First Things A Historian on the Next Conclave 

Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, the celebrated church historian in the Vatican, gave his reflections about the next conclave after Pope Francis’ selection of new cardinals in August this year. He pointed out that the title of cardinal was originally given to the senior priests of the seven regions or parishes in the city of Rome in the Sixth Century. These priests advised and assisted the Pope, both as bishop of Rome and in his care of the universal Church. When he died, they selected his successor since they had experience of the complexity of church governing and were familiar with the leading clergy in and around Rome. Over the centuries, they developed into the College of Cardinals with its traditional role in the election of the new pope. 

After the close of the Second Vatican Council, Pope Paul VI decided to internationalise the College of Cardinals. He achieved this by enlarging its membership from 70 to 120, and appointed bishops in distant regions, a move which has three clear disadvantages for a future conclave: the College is now geographically fragmented; most cardinals are unfamiliar with the work of the Vatican Cura, and many have little or no knowledge of the other cardinals. This leaves them vulnerable to lobbies canvassing favourites, a practice condemned by previous popes. 

Another disadvantage is the unwieldiness of the papal consistory of cardinals, the occasion when cardinals, new and old, are called to express their views on vital issues facing the Church. Pope Francis once called for parrhesiah at a consistory of cardinals, prior to 2014 Synod, which discussed the family and the sensitive question of Communion for the divorced and remarried. There followed a lively debate, much to the displeasure of the Pope, who wanted his own solution approved. Since then, no such free expression of views has been permitted to the cardinals. 

Cardinal Brandmüller proposed a return to the original practice of the “cardinals” of Rome, namely by allowing only those cardinals who had the “Roman experience” of working in the Vatican Cura to have a vote to elect the next pope. Not likely to happen in the current pontificate of Pope Francis!